Gamereactor reviews Mirror's Edge

White. Chalk-white. White as angels' wings. White buildings, white trees with white strains, white flower pots, white railings. If I did not know better, I would think that I was dead and in heaven. Everything is so white.

If there's one site you shouldn't trust too much it's Gamereactor. They hand out "strange" scores sometimes. It's nice that they don't follow IGN like most other sites but the problem is that they sometimes give games low scores because they didn't like the art direction etc.

So basically, they rated this game down from having its own artistic design (white design)?

How the hell can you rate something down over color palette? Its their game and they decide how the game looks? I mean if they wanted rainbow colors, it wouldnt be that hard. Games are made on computers, all they had to do was select and change color!

Its like I said, game reviews are absolutely meaningless now. Very high double standards and hypocrisy in the world of gaming. Some games are totally brown and are fully overlooked. But when others developers try to do that, oh boy, bombarded to pieces.

lol! That's what I said. They do that. I didn't even read the review but I knew they probably lowered the score for some stupid reason like the color palette. They are all a bunch of metrosexual art directors.

I was worried that it was 3-4 hours. I think for me this game will have plenty of replay value in time trials. though i'm hoping that the levels aren't as linear as the demo (there was a alternate roof you could jump to instead of static lining it but you got insta-killed you once you landed) and i never thought that the jumps in the demo were too hard to make on the first try. unless they made the demo way more forgiving then the final copy (which is entirely possible).

...as much out of the demo as some but I do feel if they had gone down a more realistic path in terms of art direction then I would have enjoyed it more.

The sterile environment, whilst obviously in keeping with the games storyline, just didn't do it for me at all. It was dull and didn't feel alive. Other than the scripted characters and occasional pigeon the city came across as being deserted.

it just seems like alot of runing, and some combat, i think you guys are giving it to much credit. Alot of running in the game is not innovation... its just running. But the art direction is awesome, and if they kept that euphoric techno sountrack through out the whole game, i might rent it.

and to be honest...it hurts my eyes after playing it...the color is too straining with red and blue trimming, it just not healthy to your eyes...this time, with this game, I'll believe my parents telling me that video game will ruin your sight...

the game was so repetitive,the game was so repetitive,the game was so repetitive,the game was so repetitive,the game was so repetitive,the game was so repetitive,the game was so repetitive,the game was so repetitive,the game was so repetitive.

Did they like pay attention to the story? It is part of the story? OMG. I played the demo and it was really intense!! After buying 6 or 7 games in 1 month and a half I thought I was done but this might be another before the end of year... :( Wallet, hurts!

If you read some of teh review (it's translated so it doesn't always make sense), you'll see that the reviewer fell to his death a lot because he made mistakes. He also complained about fighting and "missing the reaction time" to steal weapons.

A. You are running on rooftops, if you slip up, you die. B. You aren't supposed to fight groups of enemies and should avoid whenever possible even single enemies C. You suck at hitting a button at the right time.

Basically, looks like this reviewer sucked at the game and blames the game for it. Ignore this one ladies and gents, wait for someone that actually can play the game correctly.

I give this a solid 8.5/10 if the demo served as a correct indication.

no, but when you tell me in a review that you are trying to fight, when the objective is to NOT fight then you're playing it wrong. It's just like older metal gear games. You can run and gun but you'll die more often than if you play it correctly and sneak past threats.

You can't blame a game for doing what it tells not to do. Playing the demo alone confirms that you should always run from blues and fight only when you must. If there are many, you take them out one by one. This review admits to doing neither of these things and thus the player sucks.

Does that mean the game isn't flawed? heck no, it means this person isn't a qualified judge.

Ouch, well no matter what they give it I enjoyed the Demo and still have it installed to my PS3, I plan to get this no matter what anyway. They can give it a 6 all they want but, to me I feel it's about an 8~ish. Some things could be improved upon I suppose, but more or less it's still an interesting game to the gaming library.

I tried reading the review but i just don't really get what they are saying. They talk about how sterile the game looks and the button layout is alright. But i don't know as for the rest of the review i just don't know what they're exactly getting at.

surely various shades of white at least makes a change from the various shades of grey in many games nowadays? I played the demo, and I wasnt great at the fighting, but i played it a few more times and really got into it. I thought it was pretty damn good, maybe "refreshing" would be a better word